Comparison of absorbable and non-absorbable sutures used for skin closure in lower segment cesarean section.

Abstract

Objective: To compare postoperative wound infection, operative time, and blood loss in women undergoing cesarean section using absorbable (Monocryl) versus non-absorbable (Prolene) sutures for skin closure. Study Design: Non-Randomized Controlled Trail. Setting: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Akhtar Saeed Trust Hospital, Lahore. Period: April 2025 to August 2025. Methods: This study was conducted on 280 women aged 18–40 years, selected via non-probability purposive sampling. Participants undergoing elective or emergency cesarean section were divided into two groups: Group A received absorbable Monocryl sutures; Group B received non-absorbable Prolene sutures. Standardized protocols were followed for preoperative preparation, wound closure, and postoperative care. Outcomes were assessed on postoperative days 2 and 7–10. Results: The mean operative time was 59.78 ± 16.63 minutes in Group A vs. 60.79 ± 17.99 minutes in Group B (p = 0.625). Mean blood loss was 505.37 ± 178.56 ml vs. 492.79 ± 172.53 ml, respectively (p = 0.549). Wound infection occurred in 18.6% of participants. Operative time was significantly longer in the non-absorbable group among patients with wound infection (p = 0.046) and pus discharge (p = 0.040). Blood loss was significantly higher in unbooked patients of Group A (p = 0.025). Conclusion: Both absorbable and non-absorbable sutures were comparable in terms of operative time and intraoperative blood loss. However, the presence of wound infection and pus discharge contributed to longer operative time in the non-absorbable group. Clinical context and surgeon judgment should guide suture selection.